Citizenship From Birth

[Atencio 43]

With Bush gone many in the Republican party are no longer shackled to his open border / pro-illegal immigration ideology.

I sure hope you are right. As mentioned above though I think many Republicans will be eying those Latino votes too much to risk it.

[Pooky 3,850]

I sure hope you are right. As mentioned above though I think many Republicans will be eying those Latino votes too much to risk it.

What's the bigger incentive?

The 20 million or so illegal aliens, or the 210 million American citizens that support border enforcement?

[Obama 2012 1,714]

yay, another thread where Steve tries to bend the 14th amendment and its intention to his will by posting arguments from people who weren't there when it was written/ratified.

I mean after all, later generations understand the 14th amendment better than those who wrote it.

[Heracles 417]

So, a friend of my wife just came to the US for the second time to give birth to her second child. Yes, you guessed it, she came the first time to give birth to her first one. The only reason why she comes here to give birth is to ensure that her kids are US citizens. And we all pay for the pre-natal care for the last couple of month of her pregnancy and for the full cost of the delivery - somewhere around 20K for each birth. Clearly, my wife's friend as well as her baby are subject to the jurisdiction of the Ethiopian government as they are citizens of that country and she came here only on a temporary visa. I don't believe that bestowing citizenship rights on the child in a scenario like this furthers any legitimate goal.

And no, this is not an isolated incident. I am aware of dozens of such cases just from the relatively small circle of Ethiopians known to me.

Certain posters clearly see no problem with this loophole. Actually, who in their right mind thinks this is acceptable or was the intent of the amendment. Once again, people fail to grasp context nor realize that back in those days, you couldn't just hop on a 15 hour flight [max from AUS] and get to a country.

Edited August 8, 2010 by Heracles

[Heracles 417]

Edited August 8, 2010 by Heracles

[Dan J 277]

What's the bigger incentive?

The 20 million or so illegal aliens, or the 210 million American citizens that support border enforcement?

For the Republicans, they will not likely loose much going after Latino. Border enforcement is a bigger issue for conservatives than anyone else, and they likely wont go across the aisle if the Republicans don't pursue it.

Demographic trends do not favor the GOP and they need all the help they can get to stay a relevant party.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

...posting arguments from people who weren't there when it was written/ratified.

I mean after all, later generations understand the 14th amendment better than those who wrote it.

You're nothing but a hack pretending to know more about the Constitution than the real scholars who've dedicated their lives to it. I suppose Sen. Cowan's statements were 'taken out of context.'

[Heracles 417]

You're nothing but a hack pretending to know more about the Constitution than the real scholars who've dedicated their lives to it. I suppose Sen. Cowan's statements were 'taken out of context.'

Likewise, are you actually going to state that situations like the one painted above by Mr Dog is what it's intention was/is to cover?

Edited August 8, 2010 by Heracles

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Likewise, are you actually going to state that situations like the one painted above by Mr Dog is what it's intention was/is to cover?

Anecdotal situations can be made to justify just about anything. Taking away the Birthright Citizenship Clause of the 14th Amendment makes absolutely no sense, ethically or policy wise. It's part of what makes America, America.

[Heracles 417]

Anecdotal situations can be made to justify just about anything. Taking away the Birthright Citizenship Clause of the 14th Amendment makes absolutely no sense, ethically or policy wise. It's part of what makes America, America.

So then you are basically implying that the same countries you have spoken highly about and used as an example of health care, are now stupid.

Hardly anecdotal, there was an entire nightly news segment on it. Nevertheless, cannot the same be said about all of these opinion pieces you post, from lawyers.

Edited August 8, 2010 by Heracles

[one...two...tree 2,762]

So then you are basically implying that the same countries you have spoken highly about and used as an example of health care, are now stupid.

Hardly anecdotal, there was an entire nightly news segment on it.

Comparing health care of different countries to the U.S. health care system is not anecdotal. Describing to you what my cousin's experience with a doctor in Canada vs. the U.S. is anecdotal. Hopefully, you understand the difference.

That's the problem with public discourse today. People will rely more heavily on news media for 'expert opinion and analysis' over actual expert opinion and analysis. Anyone can be put on news program and labeled an expert.

Edited August 8, 2010 by El Buscador

[Atencio 43]

What's the bigger incentive?

The 20 million or so illegal aliens, or the 210 million American citizens that support border enforcement?

Well right now I would say the 20 million illegal aliens judging by our recent Presidential (in)actions

[DEDixon 39]

Comparing health care of different countries to the U.S. health care system is not anecdotal. Describing to you what my cousin's experience with a doctor in Canada vs. the U.S. is anecdotal. Hopefully, you understand the difference.

That's the problem with public discourse today. People will rely more heavily on news media for 'expert opinion and analysis' over actual expert opinion and analysis. Anyone can be put on news program and labeled an expert.

then comparing US immigration/citizenship policy/system to Canada or the UK is not be anecdotal. get it?

if you can do it with health care, others can do it with immigration. when HC was an issue, you constantly referred to what other countries were doing. however with immigration, you don't want to know or talk about what other countries are doing because it doesn't support your position. instead you have switched to scholars and experts that support your position.

Edited August 8, 2010 by DEDixon

[peejay 327]

For the Republicans, they will not likely loose much going after Latino. Border enforcement is a bigger issue for conservatives than anyone else, and they likely wont go across the aisle if the Republicans don't pursue it.

Demographic trends do not favor the GOP and they need all the help they can get to stay a relevant party.

So Republicans must just learn to accept open borders and infinite illegal immigration to accommodate the Hispanic vote if they wish to survive?

[DEDixon 39]

So Republicans must just learn to accept open borders and infinite illegal immigration to accommodate the Hispanic vote if they wish to survive?

the US is on its way to becoming a 3rd world country, it is just a matter of time. i suggest that as the US spirals downhill, legal hispanics will be fighting for their survival since the US won't be able to fund as many welfare programs and will turn against illegal immigrants. when it comes to their own survival, the tables will turn, but by then the USA will have greatly changed.

one day, it will be brown against brown because brown will be taking from brown, right now, brown is taking from white (this is how they see it) so no biggie to brown.